The Trials of Gov. Christie

[lektrode]

Re: The Trials of the Governed

Until the news of late, I admit to paying scant attention to Christie. I don't watch television and avoid most political reporting based on an understanding much like yours, lek.

But the uniformity of reaction on the right that the charges against Christie are politically motivated - somewhat true, inasmuch as the acts that precipitated them appear to be - piqued my curiosity. ....

you're welcome - and thanks for the digging.

Now all of this does not necessarily disprove the assertion that the attacks against Christie are politically motivated. And surely in politics everything is to one degree or another - from budget negotiations to photo ops with hero boy scouts. But to say that there's nothing there and all of the charges are groundless and unfounded takes an act of will I'm unable to muster.

I will say this - my impression of Romney's character has grown stronger, even if my view of his politics remains unmoved. I don't expect this will change anyone's mind about Christie, pro or con, but in my mind it puts to rest the canard that this is a media manufactured farce.

It's a farce, I agree, but the manufacturer seems to be none other than Christie himself.

http://swampland.time.com/2013/11/02...or-pufferfish/
http://www.amazon.com/Double-Down-Ga...dp/1594204403/

guess i'll have to concede on this woods - and consider myself here so enlightened - but still think any Republican gets the same treatment from the lamestream media - doesnt matter who it is - while at same time they ignore or downplay stuff that isnt flattering for their teams playahs

again - whats been happnin since 2008&12 in particular.

and i agree about the mittster - he is certainly far and away more qualified than the current occupant could EVER be - withheld my vote and went '3rd choice' last time, only because i'm NOT a Big-R type and like to send the message that the other 2 "choices" ARENT any choice other than a hobsons

but IMHO the dems choices are the worse of 2 evils - with them being THE party of the 'special' interestes - and the last several have shown it oh-so-certainly.

again in 2008 in particular - since the only reason i think they went with who they did is because they needed as much of the particular demographic as they got, to put their team in - otherwise had they gone with hilary (vastly more qualified than the current occupant) - they likely wouldnt have won - since that particular demographic might not have showed up at the polls in the same intensity - and they needed every last sliver of the electorate to win, in order to secure all 3 branches - else their biggest contributors might not've been able to GET THE BAILOUTS - which was the ONLY thing that mattered

then - once in control OF ALL 3 BRANCHES - with veto-proof majorities - they proceeded to give away the treasury to benefit NOT MAIN STREET - but lower manhattan, the auto/muncipal unions, who GOT THE GOLDMINE - while main street GOT THE SHAFT - and then proceeded with ANOTHER TRILLION DOLLAR CORPORATE WELFARE PROGRAM known as the 'affordable' care act

and call all this 'helping the working class' ???

and i wont even get into the latest 'battle for rights' - while they continue to NOT 'pivot to jobs'

the funniest thing woody?
is how many times we heard about what 'they inherited' - when WE NEVER HEARD THAT from the prev occupants - and they inherited a situation that HIS predecessors created and LEFT THEM holding the bag on beginning with the dot-bomb blowout and - oh and yeah

- the setup for 9/11 )

but thanks for setting me straight woody.

[vt]

Re: The Trials of the Governed

Yeah, Christie likely is just another crooked politician.

But Woody doesn't really go after Obama and Clinton, that are not just crooked but totally incompetent.

Benghazi

IRA Targeting of Conservatives

NSA Scandals

State Department Scandals

Fast and Furious

Obamacare

Selfiegate

Etc, etc.


The MSM tries to ignore or apologize for Democrats, but loves to go after any conservative for the very slightest transgression:



Chris Christie Is an Amateur

The left's political methods make Gov. Christie look like Little Bo Peep.

By Daniel Henninger

Jan. 15, 2014 7:16 p.m. ET


There haven't been so many reporters chasing a story in Trenton, N.J., since Washington crossed the Delaware. But compared with the methods the Democratic Party is using now to take down its opponents, Chris Christie looks like Little Bo Peep.

Gov. Christie's hyper-political aides ordered traffic jams in neighborhoods near the perpetually backed-up George Washington Bridge to annoy the mayor of Fort Lee. And they may have canceled meetings with the mayor of Jersey City because he wouldn't endorse Mr. Christie. Oh my.

The Christie bonfire has burned for a week. In that same week, The Wall Street Journal reported that the FBI found nothing in the IRS's targeting of conservative political groups that warrants criminal charges.

This conclusion struck lawyers Jay Sekulow and Cleta Mitchell as fairly amazing. Both represent conservative groups targeted by the IRS, and they say the FBI only recently got in touch with a few of their clients.

Thus, two of the most powerful public institutions in the U.S.—the FBI and the IRS—have concluded no harm, no foul, and the memory hole swallows the Obama administration's successful kneecapping of the GOP's most active members just as they prepared to participate in the 2012 presidential campaign. Many—ruined or terrified by the IRS probes—shut down. Mr. Obama won.

One may be thankful that corners of the U.S. judiciary remain intact and unintimidated. Late last week, a judge in Wisconsin slowed down what was essentially a Democratic prosecutor's star-chamber investigation of conservative groups that supported Republican Gov. Scott Walker. A special prosecutor armed with subpoena power had been poring over the groups' finances, while a gag order stopped the groups from saying they were his targets.

On Friday, a court quashed some of the subpoenas for lack of probable cause. That's good, but don't expect to see Friends of Scott Walker going on offense any time soon. Legal pistol-whippings by state prosecutors can have that effect, win or lose.

Worth noting is what the IRS's political audits and the attempted takedown of the pro-Walker groups have in common: Both took place essentially out of public view.

An event like Chris Christie's traffic jam is the Internet's version of bread and circuses. What the Democrats' left-wing activists have learned is that most of the time the Web's political media beasts are sleeping. It's most opportune during those periods of non-attention to use modern media technology not just to hit one's opponents, but to drive them from politics.

Ask ALEC.

ALEC is the American Legislative Exchange Council, a right-of-center group of state legislators who gather to compare notes on public-policy issues. The group's ultimate goal is to create templates for bills to enact their policy ideas, such as reforming state public-pension obligations.

Because this process gets laws passed, the left has created organizations whose job is to take down ALEC by frightening its financial supporters.

In December, articles appeared on progressive websites attacking Google, Facebook and Yelp for participating in ALEC's annual conference last year. The Web giants wanted to explore various Internet legal issues with the state legislators.

A coalition that included the Sierra Club, RootsAction and the Center for Media and Democracy said it outputted 230,000 petition signatures in a "Don't Fund Evil" drive to separate Google from "right-wing extremists" at ALEC, whose sin is "climate denial." The Sierra Club's site says Kraft, GE and McDonald's pulled away from ALEC in the past under pressure. To date, none of the Web companies have done so.

In coverage of the effort on a FastCompany website, one activist remarked: "It's definitely a reputational risk for these forward-looking companies like Google and Facebook and Yelp to keep their membership in ALEC."

Reputational risk? That's right.

In 2012, when ALEC got caught up in the controversy over the Trayvon Martin shooting and stand-your-ground laws, progressives saw a chance to brand the legislative group's corporate supporters as anti-black.

Here's the audio transcript of a radio ad created by ColorOfChange about CVS pharmacies, which supported ALEC: "CVS, when you hear that name, do you think of the law that protected Trayvon Martin's killer? Or laws that suppress the black vote." The ad never ran. But copies of the ad were mailed to CVS, John Deere, HP, Walgreens, Best Buy, BP and a dozen others. All disassociated from ALEC.

This is the Democratic left's modus operandi. In early December, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) sent a letter to the heads of J.P. Morgan, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Wells Fargo and Morgan Stanley, asking them to reveal any contributions to "private think tanks." Her goal, she said, was "transparency."

No, the purpose is to surface any such association so the cadres can move in and use the Web, mass Twitter feeds, shareholder resolutions and media campaigns to drive private companies out of the political arena, leaving politics in the control of public-sector interests—i.e., the state rules.

Threatening companies that participate in politics with reputational destruction is the American left's version of Maoist shaming sessions. Modern Red Guards don't hang signs around your neck. Their weapon of choice is modern media. In this league, a political traffic jam is the work of amateurs.

Write to henninger@wsj.com
_________________
Sometimes...just sometimes, the glass REALLY IS Half-Full.

[vt]

Re: The Trials of the Governed

While the Democrats delight with a scandal on the leading Republican candidate for 2016 (wayyyyyyyyy to early to early to be speculating on 2016), the GOP allies come up with some juicy details about past transgressions of the Libs (does that rhyme with fibs?) leading candidate

http://downtrend.com/robertgehl/whil...ical-behavior/

It'll be so nice when these two feuding groups of buffoons are relegated to the soap operas, the New Majority Party has dismantled FIRE, and TECI is humming successfully away

[Woodsman]

Re: The Trials of the Governed

Yeah, Christie likely is just another crooked politician. But Woody doesn't really go after Obama and Clinton, that are not just crooked but totally incompetent...

Do you need to be convinced that O and C are crooked timber, vt? Surely there's no need for you to look to me for assurance. You can look out the window and see what the weather is, as they say.

I will say this, I'm only about 10,000,000 times more reliable than ALEC inasmuch as I don't have a pony in the race and my last name isn't Koch and I could give a rat's tail if the Democrats or the GOP are elected. Those are the two who are lying to you and trying to sell you a bill of goods.

One gives it to us with plenty of Astroglide the other likes to give it to us dry. Either way, our backsides hurt. If you haven't noticed the continuity between Clinton/Bush/Obama on all matters of substance with regard to the political economy and war, well there's nothing I can say to you that will free you of your illusions.

The bird of state is an eagle with two right wings, vt. The GOP has traditionally been a bit more stupid, rigid and doctrinaire in their laissez-faire capitalism. The Democrats are slightly kinder to the eyes and ears but more corrupt. Well, I used to believe they were more corrupt than the GOP, but let's just say the last decade has freed me of that illusion.

There is no meaningful difference between the two parties. That's enough for me but you seem to have an emotional need for perfect tu quoque symmetry and tit-for-tat equivalency. Seems like a waste of time to me and I have better things to do than worry about which turd smells worse. But hey, sniff away pal.

As for ALEC, I suggest the reason "Fast Company" raises its eyebrows upon hearing that Google and others are participating in ALEC funded activities is because - again, look out the window - it's been established without a shadow of doubt that ALEC is yet another tentacle of the Koch beast.

Now you might think the ALEC and the Koch's are the greatest thing since sliced bread. I have no issue with you believing that. But if you do - particularly in the face of all we know about them - well, so much for your claims of political independence. Again, I have no issue with your partisanship for the GOP and encourage you to wear it on your sleeve if you'd like. It's a semi-free country and you can line up with whatever party or candidate or organization you like.

[shiny!]

Re: The Trials of the Governed

Yeah, Christie likely is just another crooked politician.

But Woody doesn't really go after Obama and Clinton, that are not just crooked but totally incompetent.

vt and Woody, I like you both, a lot. I consider you my friends. But I wish you would stop baiting each other, and if that fails, stop taking the bait. You guys fall for it Every. Single. Time!

All the hours you've poured into sniping at each other has changed your opinions how much, exactly? Expecting different results from the same behavior is, you know...

Or maybe this is how you express your fondness for each other. Maybe you're too embarrassed to admit you really love each other, so you pull each other's pigtails for attention. I get that. No reason to be ashamed. I'm in favor of love wherever people find it, so if that's the case, please don't let me stand in your way!

But listen: Neither political party is worth the brain cells you're spending trying to prove that there is any moral difference between them. Politicians from BOTH parties are greedy, lying, corrupt hypocrites who would happily throw you both under the bus if they thought it would serve them. What's the point of trying to convince each other that one side is 5% more corrupt than the other on any given issue? Because examples of their corruption are infinite and there will always be plenty of ammo for the other guy to say, "Yeah, BUT..."

So unless you really just love these conversations, perhaps sometimes you could maybe take a deep breath and let the other have the last word? Or say, "I disagree for these reasons," but not get so personal with the bickering?

It's just a suggestion.

[vt]

Re: The Trials of the Governed

Shiny,

Thank you I was sort of thinking likewise. It's just when someone comes up with a source with a viewpoint that Woodsman doesn't agree with, he seems to attack the messenger instead of the facts in the message. now if he did the same thing with an article on the other side of the political spectrum then no problem.

But I don't see the other side being mentioned at all by him. It's just one sided. It's sort of like the main stream media; they ignore the failing on particular side of the political spectrum, but revel in the transgressions of the other. Sure, he says afterwards both sides are wrong, but always strays at the beginning to one in particular.

The tread on The New Majority Party was started by me, and I've been consistent in condemning both parties. I cite both the Kochs' and Soros as villains.

At the end of the day Woodsman and myself respect each other, and want to see the poor and middle class helped to regain from the damage of the AFC. We may differ in how to do this, but I don't see anything personal like name calling, etc.

I learn from him as I've learned from all on this forum. I'll try to keep the discussion less frequent.

Thank you for the suggestion and your contributions.

[don]

Re: The Trials of the Governed

tip of the hat to Jesse . . .

[lektrode]

Re: The Trials of the Governed

You're welcome Woodsman...It's sad, I think all the big time criminals have moved to Wall Street. There's just so much more power and money there. Obama might eat your kids lunch to get a few votes but Jamie Diamond would eat your kid just to see what he tasted like. Even railroad barons and oil barons had to be careful they didn't overstep their bounds, but not Wall Street, they own the place.

they also OWN THE LAMESTREAM MEDIA - and since the lib-dems OWN MOST OF THE OP/ED DEPTS - all of this stuff being used to BRING IN THE EYEBALLS - which allows them to bring home the bacon as well as MOST OF THE POLITICAL ADVERTISING REVENUES

it's just a big jigsaw puzzle that all fits nicely together.

and the fact that most of em seem to get most of their editorial 'content' from faceboob and twittsville - with most of the latest round of the 51.8% getting their 'news' from them and MTV - guess we cant blame em for trying huh?

esp since the networks are flat-out running on empty - what, with all of em reverting to lowest common denominator programming for MORONS - that would be all the schtuff like 'americas lamest home goofballs' and 'who wants to be a celebrity-wannabee' and 'so you think YOU can be a moron/dance' - and hey, howz about 'americas biggest/fattest loser'

but its all in fu`un - and we wouldnt wanna focus on ANYTHING that isnt fu`un - or politically UNcorrekt - unless of course we can dump all over the GOP/conservatives - or anybody else that questions The Agenda -

While the Democrats delight with a scandal on the leading Republican candidate for 2016 (wayyyyyyyyy to early to early to be speculating on 2016), the GOP allies come up with some juicy details about past transgressions of the Libs (does that rhyme with fibs?) leading candidate

http://downtrend.com/robertgehl/whil...ical-behavior/

hey now!
that there's a SMOKING GUN if there ever was one - and will likely NEVER BE FOCUSED ON by the lamestreamers:

...It turns when she was an attorney working on the Watergate investigation, she was fired by her supervisor for “lying, unethical behavior.”
Jerry Zeifman, who said he is a lifelong Democrat, was a supervisor for 27-year-old Hillary Rodham on the committee. When the investigation was complete, Zeifman said he fired Hillary and refused to give her a recommendation.

“Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.

Dan Calabrese reports:
How could a 27-year-old House staff member do all that? She couldn’t do it by herself, but Zeifman said she was one of several individuals – including Marshall, special counsel John Doar and senior associate special counsel (and future Clinton White House Counsel) Bernard Nussbaum – who engaged in a seemingly implausible scheme to deny Richard Nixon the right to counsel during the investigation.


Why would they want to do that? Because, according to Zeifman, they feared putting Watergate break-in mastermind E. Howard Hunt on the stand to be cross-examined by counsel to the president. Hunt, Zeifman said, had the goods on nefarious activities in the Kennedy Administration that would have made Watergate look like a day at the beach – including Kennedy’s purported complicity in the attempted assassination of Fidel Castro.

It'll be so nice when these two feuding groups of buffoons are relegated to the soap operas, the New Majority Party has dismantled FIRE, and TECI is humming successfully away

well.... we CAN dream, vt - altho methinks that our gen will be too old/broke to care and too dependent upon the(ir) system to survive (or throw rocks at the beltway's glass houses).

and ya gotta luv this one....

In coverage of the effort on a FastCompany website, one activist remarked: "It's definitely a reputational risk for these forward-looking companies like Google and Facebook and Yelp to keep their membership in ALEC."

Reputational risk? That's right.

In 2012, when ALEC got caught up in the controversy over the Trayvon Martin shooting and stand-your-ground laws, progressives saw a chance to brand the legislative group's corporate supporters as anti-black.

Here's the audio transcript of a radio ad created by ColorOfChange about CVS pharmacies, which supported ALEC: "CVS, when you hear that name, do you think of the law that protected Trayvon Martin's killer? Or laws that suppress the black vote." The ad never ran. But copies of the ad were mailed to CVS, John Deere, HP, Walgreens, Best Buy, BP and a dozen others. All disassociated from ALEC.

and never ever a mention of this flavah of politicking by the 'guardians of truth'

and here's an interesting lil tidbit....

This is the Democratic left's modus operandi. In early December, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) sent a letter to the heads of J.P. Morgan, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Wells Fargo and Morgan Stanley, asking them to reveal any contributions to "private think tanks." Her goal, she said, was "transparency."

this strategy is called: out em and then let em hide in plain sight.

altho if it was anybody else sides ms warren, i'd be doubly suspicious of the motive behind this - but i still think its all part of
the DNC/dems: MASTER PLAN OF THE GRAND SCHEME

as has been their strategy of the past 1/2dozen years and its called "see how tough we were on the big bad banksters" -
IN FRONT OF THE CAMERAS - but with their hands-out behind their backs - esp since a bunch of em will be taking another ride on the revolving-door - just imagine how big the bonus the AGUS will be getting in 2017


and yep mr don - here's THE REAL STORY and even fewer of em - cept for my hero Mr Taibbi -will even go near it - would cost their op/ed depts a loss of 'prestige' - and campaign-spending REVENUES - ya know...

unless, of course - they was on the ole ALEC list....

tip of the hat to Jesse . . .

[Woodsman]

Re: The Trials of the Governed

Shiny, you gave me a wonderful belly laugh and you honor me by calling me a friend. I'm grateful.

As much as I do love bantering with vt, you're right it's getting boring. I'll pipe down after this missive and enjoy the long weekend. Speaking of which, has EJ's released the long awaited article?

Vt, you say:

"when someone comes up with a source with a viewpoint that Woodsman doesn't agree with, he seems to attack the messenger instead of the facts in
the message..."

"...if he did the same thing with an article on the other side of the political spectrum"

"I don't see the other side being mentioned at all by him"

I agree that in the case of the Kochs, I believe the messenger to be so discredited and exposed that I dismiss them without further consideration. Guilty.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_C....olitical_views
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Birch_Society#Origins

What's the "other side" of historical fact, I don't know? I think this concern is pretty consistent across the range of opinion of the responsible right center and left:

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/ar...ociety-and-me/
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2...printable=true
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/0...itical-Parties

From Buckley to Kos, there's an understanding that if the world view of the John Birch Society took hold upon the right wing the country would take an ugly fascist turn. The Koch's billions have just about brought us to the brink. I just don't see any leftist surge that's about to take over the country, but I do see the "Birchification" of the country. That's my opinion and I think there's enough evidence to back it up. End of story for me. Will it matter if the worst predictions of EJ and Armstrong and others come to pass? I bet it does, but maybe I'm too linear in my thinking and the rhyme of history I hear is just the emotional baggage of a cynical old coot. All too human, me.

But I do apologize for being a bore. I'm a little embarrassed, actually.

[shiny!]

Re: The Trials of the Governed

Shiny, you gave me a wonderful belly laugh and you honor me by calling me a friend. I'm grateful.

As much as I do love bantering with vt, you're right it's getting boring. I'll pipe down after this missive and enjoy the long weekend. Speaking of which, has EJ's released the long awaited article?

Vt, you say:



I agree that in the case of the Kochs, I believe the messenger to be so discredited and exposed that I dismiss them without further consideration. Guilty.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_C....olitical_views
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Birch_Society#Origins

What's the "other side" of historical fact, I don't know? I think this concern is pretty consistent across the range of opinion of the responsible right center and left:

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/ar...ociety-and-me/
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2...printable=true
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/0...itical-Parties

From Buckley to Kos, there's an understanding that if the world view of the John Birch Society took hold upon the right wing the country would take an ugly fascist turn. The Koch's billions have just about brought us to the brink. I just don't see any leftist surge that's about to take over the country, but I do see the "Birchification" of the country. That's my opinion and I think there's enough evidence to back it up. End of story for me. Will it matter if the worst predictions of EJ and Armstrong and others come to pass? I bet it does, but maybe I'm too linear in my thinking and the rhyme of history I hear is just the emotional baggage of a cynical old coot. All too human, me.

But I do apologize for being a bore. I'm a little embarrassed, actually.

No need to feel embarrassed. We all get worked up about stuff at times. Glad you guys took my post in the friendly spirit it was intended.

What definition are you using for the word "fascism"? To some people "inflation" means rising prices, while to others it means expansion of the money supply. Does fascism mean different things to different people?

I've seen "fascism" defined as the far right of the political spectrum, equated with militaristic nationalism, strong government power and erosion of free speech and civil liberties... We've certainly been seeing more of that.

I've also seen it defined as the merging of government and corporate power, when government controls business production. EDIT: this definition describes an economic system.

In recent years the government has gotten deeply involved in the auto industry (bailouts and restructuring), the banking industry (bailouts, manipulating interest rates by hook or by crook), the communications industry (NSA monitoring) and now the health insurance industry (Affordable Care Act). Government is dictating production, prices, pensions, policies... By this definition, fascism is as much a product of the left as of the right.

Seems to me that the left-right "spectrum" is actually a circle rather than a straight line, and not really useful as a label generator.

But I'm interested in what you and others mean by the word "fascism" because I hear it get thrown around a lot. I don't mean to start another argument. I'm just curious.

[vt]

Re: The Trials of the Governed

Shiny,

Fascism is not right wing, it is more towards the left that favors dictatorship. The Nazi party was officially known as National Socialists. What distinguished them from communism was that in communism the state controlled major industries; with fascism the government was a partner with corporations. In Nazi Germany the government was a dictatorship as are most communist governments.

Both Fascism and communism are dictatorships. Iran is a theocracy, which is also dictatorial.

The key distinction we need to consider is that true conservatives (called right wing by some) want smaller, more efficient government while liberals favor more government. The left wing including socialists and communists wants the government to own the means of production. The left also takes away freedom of speech, assembly, and religion; as well as other freedoms.

In recent American politics both Republicans and Democrats expanded the growth of government; both also supported FIRE. Both were responsible for the American Financial Crisis.

Free competitive markets in a republic like the U.S. help to better create jobs and raise living standards for all. Unfortunately today we have what I call crony socialism; taxpayer money supporting donors of both parties for their business ventures. This helps create more income inequlity.

[Woodsman]

Re: The Trials of the Governed

Fascism is not....

Vt, I leave you the last word on it. Forever.

Shiny, isn't it interesting that we're still grasping for a definition? The Wiki makes a glorious attempt at neutral POV:

Fascism is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism that came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe. Influenced by national syndicalism, the first fascist movements emerged in Italy around World War I, combining more typically right-wing positions with elements of left-wing politics, in opposition to communism, socialism, liberal democracy and traditional conservatism. Although fascism is usually placed on the far right on the traditional left–right spectrum, fascists themselves and some commentators have argued that the description is inadequate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

The Talk page is contentious, as you would expect. I think they do a good enough job of it I'm content to leave the discussion there. Uncle and peace to all.

[shiny!]

Re: The Trials of the Governed

Vt, I leave you the last word on it. Forever.

Shiny, isn't it interesting that we're still grasping for a definition? The Wiki makes a glorious attempt at neutral POV:



The Talk page is contentious, as you would expect. I think they do a good enough job of it I'm content to leave the discussion there. Uncle and peace to all.

Ta for this. I read the Wiki on Fascism yesterday. The word has so many meanings, it's useless as a label.

My frustration with labels being used to limit discourse and divide people seems to be spreading. Gov. Jon Huntsman formed the No Labels Foundation, ostensibly to break the partisan gridlock in Washington. I don't know what I fear most: politicians that are gridlocked or politicians that aren't. The No Labels movement has a number of proposals to make government, congress and the the presidency work better, but their website uses the term "common-sense legislation," which is an "assertion" form of propaganda. That phrase always sets off my alarm bells.

Reading further, it seems to be a feel-good exercise that doesn't touch the sacred cow of money buying influence in Washington. Oh, well. With luck they'll do a little good and not too much harm.

[vt]

Re: The Trials of the Governed

Shiny,

We should also get rid of the labels right and left, which are archaic as the various isms.

This is what my proposed New Majority Party's goal is. As you recall the platform is to be fiscally conservative and socially moderate. I'd amend that slight to be fiscally sound (conservative and liberal don't seem to fit meanings anymore either). Fiscally sound can denote smaller, more efficient government; it can also respect that government has a role.

As EJ has noted government spending needs to be increased during a major downturn to replace private spending that has been reduced. The problem is that stimulus spending went to campaign donors such as the banksters, teacher's unions, and failed new energy efficient businesses such as Fisker and the solar boondoggles.

This is the money that should have gone to create new infrastructure industries like EJ has been calling for in TECI. (Note: the Republicans had their own group of donors to reward after 9-11, including the defense contractors)

The problem is all governments have elites and cronies. You either have crony capitalism, crony socialism, or crony communism (see China). Apologies for all the damn isms again:-)

My new majority party will take the money and cronyism out of government. All elections would have a finite campaign amount for campaigning, with no private contributions allowed. Also all lobbying would be prohibited. Get rid of all the associations, lobbying firms, media consultants, etc. The candidates can tell their story to the voters over a limited budget over TV, and use the almost free bandwidth of the internet to further disseminate their message.

Hopefully we could take the social issues off the table as the NMP and the few Democrats left would hold the hard social conservatives at bay. The remaining Republicans and the NMP would keep spending going to the right sectors. The result would be new industries, many more good paying jobs created, less deficit, more efficient government, and less bickering.

Let's pray we can start to make progress and end the political insanity.

[Andreuccio]

Re: The Trials of the Governed

The problem is that government spending has now gone to campaign donors such as the banksters, teacher's unions, and failed new energy efficient businesses such as Fisker and the solar boondoggles.
This is the money that should have gone to create new infrastructure industries like EJ has been calling for in TECI. (Note: the Republicans had their own group of donors to reward after 9-11, including the defense contractors)

Interesting that you equate teacher's unions with bankers. It used to be attorneys and used car salesmen. Now it appears teachers are among the lowest of the low.

Out of curiosity, what exactly do you see as the crimes of teachers?